Kyle and her husband moved to Brookfield in 1986. She became active in local politics and started blogging in 2004. Her focus is primarily on local issues but often includes state and national topics, too. Kyle looks at things from the taxpayers' perspective in a creative, yet down to earth way, addressing them from a practical point of view.

"These
are pretty common-sense rights that would come to people on the
registry," Doyle said. "They're just a way we can be a little more
decent."

Nonetheless,
some say Doyle's plan would create a legal status that approximates
marriage - something that's not allowed under a constitutional
amendment approved by 59% of Wisconsin voters in 2006.

"This
was not even a thinly veiled attempt to undermine the
amendment . . . it's a direct assault," said Julaine Appling, president
of Wisconsin Family Action, which advocated for the amendment as the
Family Research Institute.

The
amendment banned same-sex marriage as well as any legal status
identical or substantially similar to marriage, such as a civil union.

In
the budget he proposed last week, Doyle called for offering limited
legal protections for same-sex couples, such as allowing domestic
partners to take family and medical leave to care for a seriously ill
partner, make end-of-life decisions and add health care coverage.

Couples
would apply for a declaration of domestic partnership with their county
of residence and would pay a fee for processing the paperwork, much
like the way other vital records are administered.

Partnerships could be dissolved through a termination process at the county clerk's office.

"These
are critical benefits that same-sex couples do need to have to take
care of each other," said Katie Belanger, legislative director for Fair
Wisconsin, which advocates for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender
residents.

Rep.
Mark Pocan (D-Madison), co-chairman of the Joint Finance Committee,
said he expects the domestic partner proposal to be part of the budget
debate.

In
past sessions, discussion of domestic partner benefits has been removed
from the budget because of the limited fiscal impact. But Doyle's
proposal would collect fees from couples who are registering and would
cover benefits for state employees.

"There's clearly a fiscal impact," Pocan said.

Legal challenge likely

Appling
said the proposal so resembles marriage that she believes it would be
challenged in court if it were to become law, and would likely not pass
constitutional muster. Her group has already contacted attorneys to
evaluate the proposal.

"He's
purporting to create a legal status that is similar to marriage," said
Austin R. Nimocks, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund,
a nonprofit legal firm in Scottsdale, Ariz., that says it promotes
religious freedom. "The bill does violate and run afoul of the
Wisconsin marriage amendment."

Fair
Wisconsin said Doyle's proposal would extend to same-sex couples 43 of
the more than 200 rights and benefits given to married couples under
the law.

Doyle's
plan would only allow domestic partner registrations for same-sex
couples who are 18 or older, are not married or in another domestic
partnership, share a common residence, and are not nearer kin than
second cousins.

Aaron
Sherer, board president for Fair Wisconsin and director of a museum in
Oshkosh, said he and his partner of 10 years have a young child and a
foster child and are in the process of planning their estates and
wills. He said they wonder how they'll be able to make decisions to
best care for each other and their family without protections for their
relationship in place.

"These
are just some fair and basic assurances that any committed couple
should have," Sherer said. "You'd like to know that should a crisis
arise and you really need to take action to care for your family."

Doyle
also called for extending domestic partner benefits to state employees,
including the University of Wisconsin System. The university has long
argued Wisconsin was at a competitive disadvantage to schools that
offer such benefits.

Two
years ago, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimated that providing
domestic partner benefits to state employees would cost $7.6 million to
$15.2 million a year.

Senate
Republican Leader Scott Fitzgerald of Juneau, legislative sponsor of
the marriage amendment, said given the state's $5.7 billion deficit and
budget cuts Doyle has proposed, "it makes you wonder if this is the
appropriate time to do this."

Pocan
said the state stands to lose more if researchers and others at the UW
System leave - taking valuable research and grant dollars with them -
because the state doesn't provide domestic partner benefits.

"The
ultimate cost is really on the other end - what we lose when we lose
talented people at the university and in state government," he said.

Benefits account for a huge percentage of our payrolls. Gov Doyle just increased that expenditure with this provision by extending benefits to gay partners and live in hetero mates.

This site uses Facebook comments to make it easier for you to contribute. If you see a comment you would like to flag for spam or abuse, click the "x" in the upper right of it. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use.